b.

f;rrettcos6 *:T
rN rHE

couRr oF APPEALS FOR THE STATE

OF OREGqN.F.E$

BEVERLY RUSHING
Petiti oner/APPel lant,
and

PATzuCK SCHWAB AND ROBERT JOHN

-S

EME COURT
URT OF APPEALS

Intervenors-Petiti oners/Appel I ants,

VS.

CITY OF SALEM,
Respondent/Resp ondent,
and

SALEM HOSPITAL,
Intervenor-Respondent/Respondent.
Land Use Board of Appeals for the State of Oregon, Case Number 2014-079

Courl of appeals Case No. (TBD)

NOTICE OF APPEAL, PETITION FOR JUDICIAL REVIEW

I) OPENING STATEMENT:
I, Beverly Rushing, am totally blind, and a longtime member of the blind
community of Salem, Oregon.

My concems in filing this appeal rest on the fact that I personally attended
the State of Oregon School for the Blind and it's only remaining Howard Hall, the
subject matter for this Appeal. There in, my concerns, tenacity, and resolve to have

the opinion rendered by the Land Use Board of Appeals corrected may be deemed
personal. However,

I believe that it is much more than that.

My participation is the tie between the overly pressing demand for

redevelopment to move on, versus the needs of our society to pause, parlicularly
the Citizens of Salem, to maintain respect for significant history in how local
mankind previously served those in need. In our ever

closing p. I of 4

social relations we need to realize that it is more than about us. Our lives and
relationships effect many.

The location of Howard Hall is perfectly located on a corner of Salem where

people, waiking, bicycling, embracing and just absorbing the elements of Bush
Park, Willarnette University, and the break between business lives and appreciation
of our very existence, may find encouragement. And so it is that this example of
historical significance should remain available to inspire our youth and those who
follow us to do the same.

II) STATEMENT OF POINTS:

This Appellant requests that the entire record, written and oral, be produced
for the record, However, quickly, some of my points are, but not limited to, are

as

follows:

A) Historical Commission Hearing:

It is apparent that in the LUBA review, too muih emphasis was focused on
what the Salem City Council perceived as their right to violate their own rules and
statues. The analysis of the opinion rendered by the Flistorical Commission should
have been paramount.

B) Probable Beneficial Use of the Building:

When the neighborhood realized the lack of exposure flor the available use

of

the building, the Salern Hospital site facilities administrator purposely forbade that
the interested parties continue the proposal process; evell though several third parly
contacts made expressed real interest in the building as a special location and

opportunity for an educational use.

C) Negative RFP Documents:
The entire "Request For Proposals" package reiterated and exposed the true

intention of the hospital not to save a historical building that was registered as such

prior to its purchase. It was not only the hospital's stated

P.2 of 4

exaggerated costs to remediate, as suggested by the architect's report, but the

attachments that expounded on the previous Salem planning denial of their true

intent. Which was to demolish the building. Except for the "local design build

investment" interest that was aroused by members of the neighborhood, that

perceived the project as

it simply was, any distant review of the RFP would have

discarded it as a waste of time and money.

D) Poor Faith:
There is a second and separate appeal upon which LIJBA, just last week
rendered opinion on. The topic was Salem Hospital' proposed site plan and a

variance to cut down many significant trees; despite a site plan alternative that

allowed the same relative number of parking spaces and the exact same location of
the proposed new building; with the removal of very few trees.
On Friday last, the City and Hospital received (from others) a couftesy

written Notice that an injunction "shall" be filed to prevent subversion and

destruction of the topic, still undetermined in LUBA's remand back to the City.
The Notice emphasized that the definition of "significant" trees being more than}4

inch white oaks had not yet been resolved in the entire Oregon Courl systern. On

Monday, this week, 15 "significant" trees were clear cut on the old Oregon State
School for the Blind site.

Further, on Monday as well, the demolition of Howard Hall had prematurely

begun; in that its westerly trees along Church Street were unnecessarily removed
and the sewer on the property dug up and disconnected.

ilD CLOSING

and DECLARATION:

This Appellant wishes to bring issues before the Court of Appeals to prevent
any further physical disasters frorn occurring that harm the social environment

of
P.3 of4

our community.
Thank you.

Respectfully submitted this seventh day of January, 2015.

I, Appellant, Beverly Rushing, Patrick Schwab, Robert Johnson, herein proclaim
that, to the best of my ability, knowledge, and belief, that this Notice, and
statements therein, are true and accountable, and from the best known infonnation

available; and may be used as evidence in court, thus are subject to perjury.
.I.prgscribe.to this document on this the seventh of January, 2015.
...,,,
--.

u.::

.,

,,.

,_./

Beverly Rushing
Petitioner/ |pp"lprlt

--4

l,i

1/

1.,

Patrick Schwab
Intervenor-Petitioner/Appel lant

l/U^,A

Robert Johnson
Intervenor-Petitioner/Appel lant

P.4of4